| Author | Message | ||
     Furano |
Good afternoon. There are here on the forum those who have installed the Barker's exhaust on the Buell 1125r??? | ||
| Terrys1980 |
There are plenty of people who had/have this pipe. The pipe had the best cost to performance ratio. I had one on a 1125cr. | ||
| Xbuell12s |
I had one that came on my CR. Was too loud for me so I replaced it with a Jardine. I actually like the Jardine on the 1125CR quite a bit. The Barker hurt my ears even with plugs in. | ||
| Shoggin |
I loved my Barkers on my CR! Put on a Keda pipe and THAT was loud... | ||
| Furano |
The fact is that we are trying to make a replica of the Barker's exhaust on my Buell 1125r and we are missing some sizes and parameters. That's why I decided to ask those who have it. If you don't mind taking some measurements) | ||
| Conaway |
Beside the fact that technically the oem exhaust ist quite good but too heavy and has no sound i found out that the GPR Powercone EVO is a good compromise. Not too expensive, lightwide, "good" sound and it still gains some extra horsepower with the right mapping. To be honest all the barkers, jardines, Torque Hammer or even HPEs or Quat-ds are just loud with to low gaining horsepower or torque. Yes, go ahead and stone me...but that is the truth. Even if it hurts. The APH is not bad but also too loud. | ||
| Furano |
In fact, I looked at the power and torque graphs for many exhaust pipes and the Barkers exhaust is one of the leaders in power and torque. | ||
| Conaway |
I can show you three runs of the same exhaust with three different results. It's just how you use your dyno... 😉 (Message edited by conaway on January 20, 2021) | ||
| Xbuell12s |
I've got one sitting in the basement. Let me know what measurements you are looking for. | ||
| Stevel |
Conaway, Congratulations!!! Your assessment of Buell exhausts are spot on. Few of the aftermarket are as good as the stock exhaust, let alone better. They all require more fuel because they are less efficient. Most aftermarket systems do sound better, but they usually pull torque out of the bottom end and provide a bit higher torque than stock in a peaky fashion, but true power gains are usually only in the purchaser's mind. Yes, the stock system is heavy, but that weight is exactly where you want it. | ||
| Terrys1980 |
The key to the Barkers exhaust isn't the can itself, it is in the megaphone style collector. | ||
| Shoggin |
Stevel: "They all require more fuel because they are less efficient" Sorry but that is exactly wrong. Aftermarket mufflers require adding more fuel to balance the additional air thats able to flow through the engine because it is a more efficient "air pump" with aftermarket exhaust. see any dyno sheet. Conaway: Yes, of course there are ways to 'cheat' a dyno result, and advertiser numbers are untrustworthy. That is why dyno operators do extensive checks to eliminate those variables. http://autodocbox.com/Auto_Parts/80833354-1125-exh aust-shootout-test-report.html | ||
| Shoggin |
Waiting for the 'needs back pressure to make torque' comment, lololol. | ||
| Stevel |
Shoggin, I am not wrong, you are ill informed. Engine dynometers measure engine speed, delivered torque to the brake and fuel consumed along with atmospheric conditions. The numbers derived in the charts you see are derived from those measurements and corrected based on the local atmospheric conditions at the time of the test. This can include efficiency expressed in pounds of fuel per horsepower hour. You rarely see that curve published in a high performance engine comparison, but it should be for completeness. In a commercial application the efficiency is always stated. Aftermarket exhaust systems are designed to trade efficiency for increased power and to tailor the torque curve for racing applications. I have never seen in the 60+ years of my engine building experience a racing exhaust system that delivered better fuel economy......ever. A common misconception and perhaps one you make as well is that gas flow in an exhaust system or intake system is unidirectional. It isn't. It is bidirectional and can be observed by simply holding your hand over the exhaust outlet or the throttle body on the intake side. In an ideal world we could, depending on engine speed and load, change the opening and closing of the engine valves, but unfortunately we cannot with today's engines, so we have to live with gas reversion as a fact of life. As with all things, it is a balancing act of optimums. Yes, back pressure is important. If it is excessive, we lose power. If it is too low or mistimed we lose power and efficiency. This occurs during cam overlap period when the intake valve is opening and the exhaust valve is closing. This is when the incoming fuel charge is drawn by exhaust port vacuum right across the top of the piston into the exhaust system wasting fuel. A properly designed exhaust will create a back pressure wave reflected by a correctly sized expansion chamber back up through a correctly sized pipe for a specific volume of gas at a correct pipe length for a given engine speed to inhibit the flow of raw fuel and air from entering the exhaust. This will only work at a given, predetermined engine speed and load. Outside of that envelope, fuel will be wasted. Getting this right is not simple. It is a balancing act between the intake side, the head design, camshaft profile and the exhaust system. Only the factory engineers have control of all those factors. The aftermarket guys have no control or knowledge of those other factors. They have to make lots and lots of assumptions and usually they get it wrong. (Message edited by steve-l on January 21, 2021) (Message edited by steve-l on January 21, 2021) | ||
| Furano |
Xbuell12s,do you have a BARKER'S exhaust system from a Buell 1125r motorcycle? | ||
| Shoggin |
Stevel your heart is in the right place but you are changing the power conversation we are having... to economy? BSFC is one thing, HP/CC is another. In THIS conversation we are talking about Volumetric Efficiency (VE) in respect to power. An engine is an air pump. Better flowing exhaust is Better Flowing Exhaust and will flow more air with the same air pump. THAT is why you need to add fuel. To keep the mixture optimal. "Aftermarket guys" are well versed in reversion and no decent company is "guessing". There are many, many, many, well designed aftermarket exhaust systems that can be made better and without the same financial and emission restraints the OE MFG has. | ||
| 1_mike |
Me too. Have one on my CR. Loud, but no tickets. Even sitting next to a city cop at a signal. Mike | ||
| D_adams |
Lol, here we go again. Shall I post the dyno shootout pic again to prove you incorrect once again?    | ||
| Ceejay |
Those look like damn good “guesses” to me... | ||
| Shoggin |
Thanks Dean, he never clicked the link I gave him to read. Knowledge is power! | ||
| Stevel |
Shoggin, Dean, I am not wrong, just incomplete. Just as both of your thread comments are as well. Dean and I have gone round and round on this subject before. I am not only a very experienced engine builder, but I am also a very experienced motorcycle rider. I am not denying that these exhaust systems make more power. It is very obvious that they do, but it is far from the complete story. The dyno curves on display reflect WOT only. We do not ride our motorcycles at WOT all the time. In fact even on a race course WOT is used less than 10% of the time. So partial throttle is pretty important because it represents the other 90% and WOT is even less used when riding on the street. It is much easier to build a motor/motorcycle for racetrack only use. It is single purpose. Designing and optimizing a bike to use on the street is much more difficult to optimize. On the street you have to contend with all temperatures, all weather, stop signs, traffic lights, cars, trucks and unknown road conditions etc. The engine speeds used are from just off idle to max engine speed. Just because an exhaust system makes more power at WOT does not make it acceptable on the road. This is especially true with the 1125. First the 1125 handles well enough with enough power even stock to keep up with the best motorcycles on the street, but it runs like shit at low speed. These bikes are already a nightmare to drive in traffic. The last thing you want to do is impair low speed and partial throttle performance. There is none to spare. The 1125 suffers from too large throttle bodies, lazy oversize ports in the cylinder head and camshaft profiles with way too long duration and valve overlap for low speed drivability. In this respect the stock exhaust does an amazingly good job. Much better than many of these aftermarket systems. | ||
| Furano |
Guys, to be honest, after watching this video, I was very surprised at what this motorcycle is capable of on the correct exhaust system and sports card. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IeM_dX9wivs&t=1s | ||
| Furano |
Here's another video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8NCRg0YvCI&t=1s | ||
| Shoggin |
"Shoggin, Dean, I am not wrong, just incomplete. " I totally agree. "Stevel your heart is in the right place but you are changing the power conversation we are having... to economy? BSFC is one thing, HP/CC is another" I would shy away from the absolutes you are stating as well. It shows a lack of experience. [Yoda on] Your opinion does not a fact make. [Yoda off] It's all good man. I love a technical discussion! But we should keep it in it's own thread, we've derailed this badly  | ||
| Conaway |
Always these discussions 😉  | ||
| Fresnobuell |
You either have very sensitive ears or bad earplugs because the Barker exhaust is not loud enough to hurt anyone's ears if they are wearing a decent pair of plugs. And I am someone who cares about his hearing which probably makes me more sensitive to the issue..... Or maybe you ride with a brain bucket leaving your ears exposed? | ||
| Fresnobuell |
Not sure why the Keda maker posted those graphs? The Barker is superior at low to mid range and equal up top. It's the best pipe available at cheaper price point (if the prices have remained the same.) The Barker and race ECM is a simply outstanding combo. | ||
| D_adams |
I'm guessing you missed this comment?
That's what I was replying to. Not sure what got your panties in a bunch for over that comment. Steve seems to think most of us builders don't have a clue as to what we're doing. I like to point out that he's incorrect on occasion. I didn't run the tests back in 2009 or whenever it was, but all I was pointing out was the raw data. Which one posted the highest hp/tq numbers? Graphs/data don't lie. Tell me which one it is please. Is the barker exhaust cheaper than mine? Sure it is. Mine have NEVER been mass produced, they're always done one at a time by hand, which adds to the expense. I don't have a dedicated team of builders to make them, I do them in a 2 car garage. Is it better than mine? Depends on who you ask. If I had to guess, the roughly 1000+ owners out there that bought one I built think otherwise. You will rarely ever see one of mine up for sale second hand. | ||
| Stevel |
Dean, Wow! I am sorry you understood my comment the way you did. That was not my intention. There is no way I could know the level of personal knowledge anyone possesses. My meaning was that as an aftermarket manufacturer you have no control or knowledge of the engine your exhaust is going on. So, as an exhaust system manufacturer, you have to make assumptions as to what state of tune may exist on the customer's motor. Whereas a motorcycle manufacturer has total control of all the other relevant components that go into the engine. That's what I meant when I made that statement. No exhaust system is plug and play. Perhaps the greater audience here does not know how a dyno run is made. I suspect very few have actually done this themselves. To clarify, the curve you see is made of data points taken at different engine speeds. To do this, throttle is applied and then load, one after the other until WOT (wide open throttle) is present. Then torque is measured on the brake. This process is then repeated for every data point on the graph you see. What you do not see is the result of any exhaust gas analysis at each data point nor do you see fuel consumption in pounds of fuel being burned at the same data point. This is very important to an engine builder and critical in some racing classes where fuel is rationed, like F1 and MotoGP. Nor does this resulting graph identify engine performance under a partial throttle. There is no doubt that these aftermarket exhaust systems have greater scavenging ability than the factory system. This can make more power because it increases the volumetric efficiency ( the ability to ingest air into the cylinder during the intake cycle measured against atmospheric pressure) of the engine, but it is not free nor is it always good. That is why most aftermarket exhaust makers recommend a change to the fuel map in the ECU. This is necessary to compensate for the increased scavenging of the exhaust sucking unburned fuel into the exhaust system during valve overlap ( the beginning of the intake cycle and the ending of the last exhaust cycle when both valves are open. This is most annoying to the rider under low engine speed and low throttle opening conditions, as it creates an ultra lean mixture and engine stuttering. So, I guess in conclusion, the best tune will always be a series of compromises based on the intended use of the engine. (Message edited by steve-l on February 12, 2021) | ||
| Furano |
Hello everyone. Well, my exhaust is ready. Do you look like Barker's ??? The price for which I made it was 156 dollars))).  |
